· Private foundation
Htc Cottee Wurster Family Foundation 96010000
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k23 grants · $77k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $77k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA FUND | $30,000 |
| PHILABUNDANCE | $22,000 |
| UPPER VALLEY LAND TRUST | $15,000 |
| PROJECT HOME | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| The Jimmy Fund | $5,000 |
| NORTHEAST ORGANIC FARMING | $5,000 |
| BRYN MAWR HOSPITAL | $5,000 |
| VITAL COMMUNITIES | $5,000 |
| ISLAND INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| WILLING HANDS | $5,000 |
| THE HAVEN | $5,000 |
| Cradle of Liberty Council | $5,000 |
| SOUTHEASTERN VERMONT COMMUNITY ACTION | $5,000 |
| TOWN OF VINALHAVEN | $4,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $148k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 63% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +49% for the ones you funded once.
52 repeat relationships — 23 still active in FY2025, 29 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- TCTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA4× · 2017–2020 · $135k · revenue +88%
Philabundance8× · 2017–2025 · $104k · revenue +101%- UVUPPER VALLEY HAVEN6× · 2017–2023 · $67k · revenue +107%
Funded once
- VCVARIOUS CHARITIESone grant, 2021 · $140k
- HVHOMESHARE VTone grant, 2024 · $8k
- VLVermont Law Schoolgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $8k · revenue +49%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Cvph medical center's mission is to provide quality health care for the north country region in upstate new york.
The Organization works with local landowners to permanently protect natural land and waters that define its community and enrich the quality of life by purchasing, managing, negotiating and developing conservations easements in the Upper…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Vermont public informs, educates, and entertains through public service journalism and enlightening content rooted in vermont. our storytelling enriches lives and fosters community connection and understanding.
UVCHS in a not for profit organization that provides medical dental behavioral heath and pharmacy services. Our goal is to make quality care available to everyone regardless of demographic or economic status. We accept all major insurances…
Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.
The sole purpose of the svhc foundation shall be to engage in development and fundraising activities exclusively for the support of the southwestern vermont health care corporation and affiliates.
Southwestern vermont health care exists to provide exceptional health care and comfort to the people we serve. see schedule o for additional details.
Cvmc works collaboratively to meet the needs and improve the health of the residents of central vermont.
The mission of Midcoast Conservancy is to protect vital lands and waters on a scale that matters and to inspire wonder and action on behalf of all species and the Earth.
Saint anselm is a catholic, benedictine college providing all of its students a distinctive liberal arts education that incorporates opportunities for professional and career preparation. it does so in a learning community that encourages…
Serve as the governing organization for physicians who are employed to provide clinical services to affiliated member hospitals (the "affiliated hospitals") of the university of vermont health network ("uvm health network").
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Islands Community Medical Services and the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 39 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
44 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 44 of the 71 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA ↗
- Who funds Philabundance ↗
- Who funds UPPER VALLEY HAVEN ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HOME ↗
- Who funds UPPER VALLEY LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Island Institute ↗
- Who funds UPPER VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds WOODSTOCK COMMUNITY FOOD SHELF ↗
- Who funds LOUIS SEGRETO 26 FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds VITAL COMMUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHEASTERN VERMONT COMMUNITY ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds LISTEN Lebanon in Service to Each Neighbor ↗
- Who funds HOLDERNESS SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds ISLANDS COMMUNITY MEDICAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST ORGANIC FARMING ASSOCIATION OF VERMONT ↗
- Who funds VINALHAVEN LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA AVALANCHE CENTER ↗
- Who funds Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health ↗
- Who funds THE BRYN MAWR HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BIG SKY BRAVERY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds HOMESHARE VERMONT INC ↗
- Who funds Vermont Law School ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood of Northern New England Inc ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Vermont Community Foundation · Middlecott Foundation · The Couch Family Foundation · Emily Landecker Foundation Inc · Maine Community Foundation Inc · McCollom Family Foundation · New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · Mascoma Bank Foundation · The Help for People Foundation · Flora R and Isidor M Stettenheim Foundation Inc · Barrette Family Fund · Frank and Brinna Sands Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Htc Cottee Wurster Family Foundation 96010000 funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Southeastern Vermont Community Action Inc — 83% of income from government
- Upper Valley Haven — 38% of income from government
- Homeshare Vermont Inc — 32% of income from government
- Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont — 31% of income from government
- Willing Hands Enterprises Inc — 17% of income from government
- Vermont Law School — 14% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Vital Communities Inc — 5% of income from government
- White River Partnership Inc — 4% of income from government
- Upper Valley Trails Alliance — 3% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood of Northern New England Inc — 2% of income from government
- Zack's Place Enrichment Center Inc — 0% of income from government
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.